Skip to main content

tv   Q A  CSPAN  March 14, 2011 6:00am-7:00am EDT

6:00 am
[unintelligible] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> today a look at the gop plans to create jobs with representative mike coffman of colorado. also discussion on u.s. border security with immigration and customs enforcement director john morton. after that, we will talk about the centers for disease control
6:01 am
and diagnosed diabetes at 7:00 a.m. your on c-span. ♪ >> this week, a discussion on foreign policy and nation- building. our guest is john hulsman, senior research fellow at the hague centre for strategic studies. he is also president and co- founder of his own international relations consulting firm. >> i want to start by asking you a simple question, what do you do? >> by on a political risk consultancy and i advise governments banks and businesses about what is like to live in the new world we live in a rising powers and declining america and a declining europe. how do you make money and create jobs? it is a complicated and scary place.
6:02 am
it is more creative and i will do it for clients and the more honest than a where do you live? >> i live in germany will have my head office. the dutch government is one of my clients. >> why would somebody hire you? >> i have a unique background. i have been educated in europe. i understand europeans. i lived and worked in washington. i'm a member of the council on foreign relations and i work for the center for strategic international studies. i worked at the heritage foundation on the right and the council is in the middle. i know the points of view of the schools of thought in washington. >> were was, originally? >> ohio, and a good ohioan, a place called rocky river.
6:03 am
>> why the cato institute? >> why the cato institute? >> they let the politics fall where they fall. they have been deeply unfashionable. they say we have to have a foreign policy within our means. eisenhower is my favorite modern president. it would ruin our domestic equilibrium, we will not be a great power. the cato institute focuses on economics. that is what i do with my job.
6:04 am
if i am asked to do anything, i will take the transatlantic flight. >> why would the dutch government want you? >> when you are in europe, you talk about america. they talk about the american decline and nobody talks about that here. they talk about when the dollar will be attacked. they are not happy about it. they think it is terrible. their cake -- they care intensely about the greatest ally getting weaker. when an america i talk about europe. i have a unique background to be on both sides of the atlantic. >> give us a scenario where the dutch government is using your expertise. do you go to them and go to them and talk to them on the fun? >> i work at a think tank called
6:05 am
the hague centre for strategic studies and the dutch government funds by stay there. they call me up from the foreign ministry. he wants me to explain the tea party. party. what is the philosophy behind this? they want a -- an american political analyst to tell the. >> do they ask you to come to washington to lobby for them? >> no, i would never lobby. i did not want to game out what i thought. i want to say what i thought empirical was the truth. if you or your own boss, you can do that. you have to be able to say no to the client. i would never lobby for anybody.
6:06 am
>> where have you lived in the world? >> i have lived in scotland for 89 years. that was the best decade of my life. i lived in washington for about a decade. i now live in bavaria. that is the headquarters of my office. we do work in london, the indian ocean rim, and the united states them have worked for american politician directly? >> no, i was distressed because i listened to their aides to much. much. >> what politicians did you do work for? >> everybody, joe biden on the
6:07 am
nato issues. i did work for the finance committee, the treasury committee, the foreign relations committee, the international relations committee, i talked to tons of staffers. tons of staffers. they know i am a member of the council. that is what they like. i don't have to charge american clients as much. clients as much. they care about being plugged in. >> right now, what kind of
6:08 am
different organizations are paying you? >> the dutch government, the british government, the german government, i do things on the brics, the cameron people, some of whom i knew in college. banks like barclays is a customer i have worked with on the gold price which is political. people like bank of america merrill lynch is a good client. i talk about the middle east and how that will affect oil prices. >> how many people are there out there like you? >> it is a growth field that can out of nothing. ia ia ian bremer but the small boutique ted people like me, there are 20 or 30 of the out there. it is becoming a thing because you don't have to argue to
6:09 am
businesses and government. we take the knowledge we have in the think tank that monetize it. then you can speak the truth. you are wealthy and you can be honest and i would never go back to a think tank that was part of the bavaria do you live in? >> i live in rosenberg which is in northwest bavaria. i am gone about half the time. i have about 20 people working with me directly and indirectly. you can manage quality with that low number. i don't have to check the footnotes. that is what i rely on. >> are you married? >> i am about to be. i will be married to a pretty german girl, hello eva. that is the reason i welcome back is because i love them what languages do you speak? >> i can understand french a
6:10 am
little bit and english and german. >> what do europeans assume about americans? >> we don't care what is going on in the rest of the world, we are still involved, for good and bad reasons. they think we are woefully ignorant about the way the world works them is that true? >> yes, but so are that. ey. the germans are very isolationist. you can ask about china but they don't care. >> are they angry about us? >> yes, i have a classics background and if you go to greece, you couldn't have graffiti -- you confined -- you can find graffiti about the
6:11 am
greeks dissing the romans. i think it is unfair. if the look of eisenhower, truman, jack kennedy, we have run aground on foreign policy for a long time. what worries me is that congress in both parties are operating their ignorance. it is tragic. you have to know more about the rest of the world. this is india and china and south africa and the gulf states and malaysia and singapore and turkey. if you don't know about these things, you will not thrive in this new world. when people pride themselves on never leaving the country, it makes me or roll my eyes. >> where are the american politicians operating their ignorance? >> when they say they don't have a passport and they are proud of it. they should leave the country. look at the people who ran our country during the cold war. international businessman like
6:12 am
harriman. he was an international businessman who understood the world and the linkages. he worked for the greater good of the republic. we miss those wise men. we miss people with global experience. i love bush i for that reason. if you don't have global linkages, the world will not make sense. >> january 13 was an event at the cato institute. here's a clip where you talk about general eisenhower's farewell address. >> other things i learned in washington -- it is almost impossible to lose your job in a think tank. it is not the real world. i worked hard at it. it is hard to lose your job. in the real world, it is easy to lose your job. if you look at the numbers about what he leets think about
6:13 am
foreign policy in america and the average people do, is the greatest disconnected 60 years for the second most popular way to tackle the deficit, 20% of the people say cut defense spending. the number one area of the world that needs to be fixed first is washington. 36%, that is healthy. >> start with the fact that it is hard to lose your job at a think tank. >> you almost cannot be fired. if you just described rather than analyze, how many times have we heard of the cold war is over? if you just described and are if you just described and are inoffensive and play the game, almost no one has lost their jobs includ. it is really difficult if you go along with the prevailing winds. you could have a secure life and i understand the value of that.
6:14 am
it was not an easy thing to do to speak out about iraq. at the time, president bush's approval rating was 80%. morley, that call for courage. -- morally, that called for courage. either you serve the country and play the ball and not the man or you game this out. most people game it out. that is different than the real world. part of the disconnect is that most people in washington have a very secure livelihood and most americans don't. >> if you are a viewer and you watch thinktank sessions on this network, what would you advise people to do? >> differentiate between when they describe things as opposed to actually save them. we all agree that america is not as powerful as it was in 1945.
6:15 am
the soviet union does not exist anymore. people have taken these platitudes in descriptive ways. be suspicious of what they are saying. because we live in a multipolar world, america should shift part reform policy to do these things. the more specific people are, the more interesting work they do. these platitudes keep you going. you are not serving yourself or the public by doing that. >> did you find yourself in a difficult position with the think tank when you said things they did not like? >> they did. it was a policy difference. it was not personal. it was that heritage and i enjoy being there. it started out being very broad. i thought they had every strand of thinking. i enjoyed that. as time went on and things got
6:16 am
worse for the president bush, it was a circle your wagons mentality and i could not go along with the policy. your wagons because of what? >> after mission accomplished when things did not go that way, it was hard to argue that things were going well. it seemed we were chilly and not doing our job which was to question everyone. adon't think he was advancing conservative foreign policy. it was not burkian, it was utopian. it was expansionist it. itic. how do you think you could socialize a country you know very little about. >> how often does a think tank
6:17 am
to what they're doing because of the money they get to? >> it you get a whole bunch of different donors, you can ignore most of them. you can always have alternate sources of funding. did you have two or three big donors, you have to do what the donors said. y. i think heritage is about conviction. they forgot what it was to be a conservative. if you see the money that was spent on iraq where the dietary secretary of defense said the war would cost nothing and made him head of the world bank, this is what countries in declined do, they reward people who should not be rewarded. that is a $1 trillion error. the gulf war made iran the dominant power in the gulf. that is the case. we have to be held accountable.
6:18 am
if you do -- if you don't dwell in sales, you are fired. >> what is the most prestigious think tank in the united states as viewed from overseas? >> the council on foreign relations. in terms of name and prestige, they have the magic of the kind of woodrow wilson wiseman prestige. europeans are deeply impressed that i am a member. >> how much as a cost per year to belong to the council? >> by my lowly god, at about $400. >> here is more from your cake to institute conference. >> in 1954, the french are in agony over vietnam and there is pressure on eisenhower to intervene. eisenhower realizes that general ridgway is against intervening. intervening. he says what would it cost to
6:19 am
intervene in indochina? general which way does this and does not make up numbers. he did not say iraq would cost nothing. then they made him head of the world bank. i find is breathtaking. i was in the room when he said it will be a neutral cost current i'm sure i miss her. that is no small mistake. do you want to $1 trillion back? we don't know what will happen and we might need that down the road. that is a different way to look at the world than the way they do in washington. the number comes back from general ridgway. $3.5 billion. i don't know what that is now
6:20 am
but it is a large number. but it is a large number. what does he do? he calls in the secretary of the treasury. he says to george humphrey, what would this mean? he promised to get out of korea, balance the budget, and cut taxes. mr. humphrey says it will mean a deficit. eisenhower says that is the end of it. boy do i miss this. >> do you think it was that simple? >> i do because i think eisenhower on like the guys in both parties now have a pet -- at a basic fundamental simple strategy. he had five or six things you live your life by one of them was to have to live within your means. whether you're a government or a person and you don't, you can do that for a while and we can print money for another 10 years.
6:21 am
nothing much will happen for awhile. you can do that. in the long run, you are selling the silver to pay the butcher bill and that is a bad idea. all of our strength is economic strength. the fact in world war two that week ago from an army of to a thousand people to an army that had 7 million people only makes sense if you understand the economic wherewithal the general marshall understood about the united states. that is the notion of our strength. if we lose that, very quickly, we cannot do that. that is the logic of eisenhower. neither party is addressing this. >> which european country live within their means? >>two are beginning to do it. in a markell germany has done
6:22 am
in a markell germany has done rather well -- you markell's germany has done rather well. donea merkel's germany has rather well. they have a constitutional amendment or they can only run minor deficits. they have lived up to that. they have done very well. the other country is a david cameron's of britain. they cut 25% from department to department. margaret thatcher could only dream of this. it is radical reform with austerity and it is fascinating to watch as they can pull it off. both of those countries have done well to fly -- follow this eisenhower dictate. the bond market stopped attacking the pound after david cameron did this. people believe he is trying to reach those numbers. that takes courage and honesty about what can be afforded. that is a totally different way
6:23 am
of doing business than in america. we have not had to make a strategic decision since 1941. we do everything and it doesn't go right, you shrug and say it does not matter. you can do that when you are the only power in the world. the margin of error is a much smaller now with china, india, south africa -- north africa breathing down your neck. >> germany has over 80 million people and the united states has 310 million people. we spend close to 700 of the million dollars per year on defense. how much does germany spend? >> nothing. that is a tremendous difference. if you add in veterans affairs and the real number and the wounded coming back horribly maimed and we owe them care, it is probably about $1 trillion. we spend about 1% on defense.
6:24 am
they have made a decision that they will free ride off of american defense spending. the germans have benefited from that. through the years, the british spend a the neighborhood of 3%. they exceed the 2% a nato member. they are cutting that radically now because they have to. >> what would these countries do with the united states cut 25% of its defense budget? >> they would be shot but not much would be changed. in europe, they realized the gap. in the soviet union, it does not exist. other than policing al qaeda, they don't care a whole lot. they don't feel the same about nation-building. i have never heard a european explain afghanistan to me.
6:25 am
they just want to stay close to the united states. we are the only country in the world who seems to take third grade problems make them first- rate problems. >> how much of which cut the number of american troops in germany? >> it is significant. it is in the neighborhood of about 100,000. when you go to ramstein, it is strange to visit. i go there and i say a movie theater that looks like ohio. the middle of a german background. it is not sustainable. we need those troops in bulgaria and lithuanians. there is no hassle politically and we get tax breaks doing it and we are closer to the action in the middle east. the old german garrison thing is on its last legs. >> , need we have there now? >> i think the number was
6:26 am
75,000. in the end, we don't need those troops there. there is no enemy there. positiongoing to troops, we should do it further east in places like romania and bulgaria who are more pro- american. they would give us a better deal because they want our troops there for security. >> back to the cato institute, >> according to the president's a on optimistic numbers assuming growth of 4% per year until 2020 which is true if you are brazil but not the eyes states, assuming these numbers are correct, the 80% of the budget will be medicare, medicaid, social security, interest on the dead, and defense spending. something has to give. you cannot cut the interest on the debt. you have to pay the bankers. we have seen the efforts of
6:27 am
medicare and medicaid. nobody wants to deal with social security. that means whatever you do, you have to cut defense spending. secretary gates is trying to get ahead of the curve into it on his own terms. we are fiddling while rome burns. that is not a discussion i hear from either party. >> secretary gates as an image of wanting to cut defense but the budget out of the pentagon in is more than either the house or the senate is willing to give them. >> he is very good. he is my wing of the republican party. i like him. this is nonsense. limiting the increase in defense spending which is what we are talking about given the three numbers that i always use and are important and most americans understand the people in washington don't -- 1/3 of all
6:28 am
americans are of retirement age. so security is supposed augment things but not be your retirement. that is what it was supposed to do. 1/3 of americans have no savings of any kind. 1/3 of mortgages are under water and 1/3 of our wealth went down the drain during the crash. you cannot do everything at once and given the financial reality. i came back to talk about eisenhower because he would have instinctively understood that that is our foreign policy priority. i'm not calling us to do nothing. i am calling us to make choices given the reality and save our country. it reminds me of ex girlfriend i have a love or even from a distance. >> people might say that this
6:29 am
guy has abandoned us. he has all the answers and is living in germany. why should i listen? >> i would say because i put my money where my mouth is. it would be easy for me to be a think tank person that went along with the crowd when bush was at 85% and say nothing. i believe the new york conservatives believe what they think. i believe they are sincere but i think they are horribly wrong. i dislike people in washington who voiced doubt privately that don't to anything publicly. >> how often do you see that? >> constantly, it is moral cowardice. the people at home should listen to them -- listen to me because i do care. i give up an incredibly secure job. i was a senior research fellow at one of the largest and tax advice said nothing, i could have been assistant secretary of state.
6:30 am
i had something to lose and i lost something doing what i thought was right. thought was right. i don't think most people in washington could say that. >> how old are you? >> i am 43. >> do you want to live in your for the rest of your life? >> no, i think of the west wing. if i find a guy who is the guy that you could really work for, i would come back. it is not forever. i miss living in the united states a great deal. europe is wonderful but it is not home. >> what do you miss about the states? >> the vibrancy and >> the vibrancy and friendliness and the decency. europe is obsessive that every great social distinction. in europe i am called a doctor and at home i and john. i miss the egalitarianism. you can't do that in europe.
6:31 am
i miss that tremendously. they are hard working over there but i miss the quintessential american stuff. >> you name the medicare, medicaid, social security, the interest, and the other one was defense. what else is there? >> discretionary spending ea earmarks, valine i made. -- a they annoy me. the five things i mentioned are everything. discretionary spending is a worthy fight to fight over 20% of the budget but is not the story and they don't know it. i'm outraged they are not telling people the truth. the five things i mentioned are everything. until we address all five of
6:32 am
them, our status as a great power is on the line. >> living in bavaria, advising the dutch, you're sitting in the middle of europe, tell us the difference. is there medicare? >> there is, they have cushy social programs in europe. they can pay for them because they don't have defense spending. if you list the most popular programs in germany, the fans is last. -- defense defense is last. they have a wonderful train system. you can afford that if you don't spend money on defense. they are still in terrible trouble. they have demographic problems that are worse than ours. we have legal and italy -- illegal immigration. i said in a train in germany and
6:33 am
i am the only one of working age. everyone is very young and many are very old. it makes you crazy. it is not a sustainable system. they have horrible economic problems but they are different because they put their money into the social system. we have the reserve currency and the dynamism. this will hit us later. we have five, six, seven years on them. they will have more people retiring with benefits. you used to expect people to die at 62. that is different than people to be 80. we talk about these 18 years in between and how to fund them. one way is to have a response will foreign policy and eisenhower would instinctively know that. it is tragic that no one in the republican party can say that. >> the interest that we pay our
6:34 am
debts, what is it like in germany? >> their interest rate is stable. they have done that well. if you don't count state and local, a lot of our debt interest is is fine. but you have to count that. their death rate is between 60% and 80%. ours is about the same but hours used to be 49%. we're still spending $1 trillion debt after the crash. after a crash, you have to do something. ok, when that's over, you need a deficit plan. bowles simpson was a wonderful program and everyone is running away from it.
6:35 am
it would require spending cuts and tax increases. it would require slaughtering sacred cows in both partisan they are not prepared to do that. i advise clients to bet against the dollar until we do. >> what do the europeans blame on america right now and the way the world is going? >> the french are the most extreme. there's a wonderful german world's sh calledadenfreude which means to be happy about someone else's mesisfortune. implicit in their assumptions was that a declining america would be a rise in europe. that is not what happened. is a rise in india and china. the number 1 ally is now in terrible trouble. they are now deeply concerned.
6:36 am
the dutch government has meetings about what we do about an america that cannot pay its bills and more. >> i wrote down a number of words that describe you based on your past columns. you call yourself a jeffersonian. >> i believe in small, limited, accountable government and balanced budgets and i believe the government should be local and less government is often better than you call yourself a moderate republican. what does that mean? >> it means i have an eisenhower view that i believe social engineering is a bad idea for the united states and the rest of the world. we have to live within our means. >> you said you voted for barack obama. >> i did because given the choices which is one has to do, i thought mr. obama had never run anything which disturbs me given this crisis. neither had senator mccain and mccain is a prisoner of the cold war because of what happened to him in his wonderful service.
6:37 am
the very qualities that made mccain effective in the cold war world, clarity, decisiveness, courage, leading, in a multi- polar world are bullying, misunderstanding, making things simpler complicated. it is a tragedy he has outlived his time. obama being younger and understanding was a better bet. i'm not a fan of sarah palin. i could not leave the cowboy one heartbeat away from the presidency. >> you talk about the democrats and recession at kate insisted in january. >> i hear from democrats that it is all george w. bush's fault. i'm not big fan of george w. bush pr. however, to blend hapless? present for this is a bit much and it is a reactionary, and from our secretary of state when
6:38 am
she says that once we get over these local difficulties, when she was running for president, we will go back to the way things were in the 1990's. that is a curious reactionary comment from a progressive person. we have to get into a time machine? like how can she say such a silly thing? it is before 9/11 and before iraq and afghanistan and before the great crash and before the multi-polar world. of course she wants to go back. you can do anything uni-polar world. the amount of room for making mistakes was huge. in a multi-polar world, the margin of error is very small. you cannot do everything you want to do. that is the world that nobody in washington seems to be able to fathom. of course she wants to go back.
6:39 am
that is understandable and pointless. that you think these things will go away. this is a 500-year change in power and the world. it is staring us in the face and knowing -- and no one's doing anything. >> people see these think tanks and session. why do people go there and listen to people like you? >> [laughter] >> there are thousands of them. >> i had a staffer who went to every meeting. he would report back to me. he was a professional meeting and gore. goer. you notice about washington, it is like i school. you want to be seen with the
6:40 am
cool kids walking into the room. you want to walk in with kissinger and ha richardase, you want to be part of the decisionmaking process for access to that power, being by the high school quarterback is what matters. part of that is the reason. there is a juvenile games playing. the second reason is that you want to know what is going on and the argumentation of ideas in washington. many staffers are sent along to take notes and we read some and we say one guy is interesting. or you might not like something but you appreciate the way they think. that is useful. frankly, more of it is to be seen them the information. one reason i pushed the envelope when i speak is to elicit
6:41 am
responses, to change the way people think and do things they don't expect. i want to actually say something. much of it is being seen on a panel. if you sit in the crowd, you are on a level. everything is rigorously graded. everybody knows their place. people worry about these things constantly. i have not lost sleep about the center-left. center-left. >> in watching the meeting, you had to some goodzingers and humorous remarks and the crowd was expression < they had no idea. >> one thing that is missing in washington -- think of lincoln and jefferson and adams, they had a sense of humor. less gravidive you
6:42 am
to us. it makes you a more balanced human being. these guys are humorless. these guys are humorless. the romantic poets were humorless and they never saw the back end of 40. that is not a good thing. you can find life on and try to make a better. when i speak, i am often met by incomprehension and no facial expressions of any kind because they are not used to someone talking. >> why did you call george bush hapless? >> i think he will go down as one of the worst president we ever had. i would use historical arguments to make that argument. he expanded the deficit and did not see this tremendous problem not see this tremendous problem that was coming his way. he is a herbert hoover kind of figure. he did a new entitlement program for senior citizens that was totally on affordable u and wasn-republican. >> prescription drugs? >> exactly.
6:43 am
he left iran as the dominant power in the gulf after our inventors in iraq. to leave our nemesis in charge of the persian gulf region will go down as a horrible moment. it will be seen as the boer war was for the british. i think bush will be tagged indelibly with that. >> people say what is going on in northern africa and the arab countries is a direct result of iraq. >> the people in the streets to say that is rubbish. promoting democracy is a wonderful thing but doing it at the barrel of a gun is different than it being organic. people in the street are clear that there is a huge demographic problem in egypt. young people have no jobs and 40% of the people live on less than $2 per day and they are the largest wheat importers in the
6:44 am
largest wheat importers in the world and the price of wheat doubled in the last year. it has nothing to do with george bush or the united states. americans don't seem to understand. this is about egypt. this is not about what america did or did not do. we are a peripheral bystander. a little humility is a good thing. does not mean we cannot do anything. we have to be very careful about what we influence. i hear from obama people that his courage the to inspire this. that is equally rubbish. tunisia worked and that is what sparked to them. they could go into the street and not get killed. america had no part of that. >> they may never get this country credit for what happened but they sat there and watched the saddam hussein go away and that given the power and the strength and the internet help them because they could see the other way of living and a
6:45 am
satellite television. >> i think the soft power we have is important. we have power but you don't manage soft power. manage soft power. they are not commenting in a movie. the image of america is our openness and our freedom, liberty we enjoy. i think that is tremendously important. ronald reagan got that right. clinton got that right. america still has tremendous power and pull around the world. in france, they tax american movies. it is an attractive way of living. people like that. if we fritter away our fiscal
6:46 am
standing, we are frittering away her example and that is the greatest and we have going for us. >> are there many think tanks in europe? your associated with aspin, italy? who runs that? >> that is a great example of soft power. the aspen institute in the united states as branches, one in italy, one in france, the italian one is the biggest. i write for them regularly on line. i read in english and they translated for me. they have these ties around the world. that is a huge source of power -- soft power. >> who paid foraspen? >> i don't know exactly. i think they have dues-paying members. heritage had no federal money of any kind and i found that good.
6:47 am
i am not sure about aspen. >> you lost your microphone. pick up and put it on because viet audience will wonder what happened. >> you get to meet the leaders around the world. if you meet someone, you can speak frankly to them. i have met the italian coalition partners and aspen event in rome and the fact that i have met the person trying to unseat silvio berlusconi, the fact that i right in there, this is the soft power about being an american of broad that are positive. >> go back to rocky river, ohio. >> it is about one hour from cleveland. it is on the link between toledo
6:48 am
and cleveland, on lake erie. >> what were your parents doing? >> they are wonderful people. my father was an executive at account at a clothing company and my mother was a teacher. many in my family were teachers. to grow up in that environment was very nurturing. that is the best thing that ever happened to meet them when did you first leave? to see thelly went an world. i saw this stuff for the first time and i want to be part of it. i want to see paintings in person. >> what year did you graduate from high school? >> 1985.
6:49 am
i grew up and ronald reagan's america. i remember jimmy carter vaguely. were more the formative experience of my life. >> you say you went to st. andrews in scotland, did you go to another school here before you went there? >> i was one year at university of michigan in ann arbor and i went to st. andrews as a junior abroad. i told my father i wanted to stay there. he said we will miss you. they were middle-class people and could not come to see me. >> what about being a foreign policy analysts? when did that come into your life? >> very early, in high school, there is debate. there is a domestic component an international component. at the age of 14, i thought i would give the international component a try. i never really stopped reading
6:50 am
the paper. >> you say that high school debate by the difference in your life? >> that was fundamental. when i worked abroad and the u.k., st. andrews is the seminal experience. >> if you were to name three or four people international figures -- national figures that had an influence, would they be? >> my father made history and important part of my life. my mother loved english and loved writing. that was an honorable thing to do with your life. on the bigger side, people like eisenhower. when i read about the things american can -- americans can do -- we are a country that produced mr. jefferson, mr. adams, and mr. franklin. we are not the worst place. people like ike and jack
6:51 am
kennedy really mattered. >> what about issues? >> here's what i would do. the indian ocean rim and china is where it's at and where the future growth of the world is. prices are for bad analysts. prices are for bad analysts. look at the tenures from 2006 back and a year-on-year growth rate. it is compelling. almost every problem in the world emanates from this region. let's learn about it again. let's be foreign-policy analysts again. if we don't, we will be in trouble. we should not do nation- building. it is eloquently silent about darfur. from the left because there is no money. this is how things will change. they have no options. this is a change. this is a change. >> that reminded me that george
6:52 am
bush said no nation building in the campaign and obama said he would shut down guantanamo. you also read about convention. why do we go through all this is what they promise on all sides they don't follow through on? >> part a it is the disconnect the between elites and the regular people. the differences at a 40-year high. most americans don't want to do nation-building. most elites are not aware of how bad things are in the country. they literally don't understand. they are not in that situation. it is the mccain argument.
6:53 am
one we use the military? if you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. that is a good managerial argument but it is poison. everybody gets dragged in because the people in washington, from this background. the advisers want to take the present by the shoulder and lead him by the shoulders. >> i have a book here that you wrote. "called the godfather doctrine. " >> michael rider came to visit me in germany. we're watching the movie and he said the funny thing is that when the three boys argue, the great character played by marlon
6:54 am
brando has been hit, the three sons are arguing, they argued similarly to the three arguments to get in america. you get the neo conservative art in whichsonny, let's shoot everyone report. tom hagen says we need to negotiate and talk to everyone. they sound like democrats. michael is the only one who acts like a realist and says it depends on the situation whether we use force or we don't. it is a situation a reality. all the cares about is the family of surviving. that is where i am. i don't care how we get there. i think we should use these things creatively to for the benefits of the united states.
6:55 am
>> you have another book about lawrence of arabia. at the top, you have a quote from lawrence wilkerson, the former chief of staff to colin powell. you talk about colin powell being a realist. people watching this would say he had a chance and he did not stop the idea of going to iraq? >> i think he was a shakespearean tragedy. i think he was a realist but general powell did what he did his entire life and i have great respect ansar with him. i think che he was ack up on -- i think he was a check upon the system that failed. he chose to be a good soldier and not a great statesman. if he had resigned and tenet had gone with them over shaky intelligence, we would not have gone into iraq. he has a tremendous historical burden. i think he knows that.
6:56 am
that must be an awful thing to live with day to day. i like wilkerson. given the chance to implement, he failed them and go back to paul wolfowitz and where he said when asked how much it will cost and he said mostly nothing. >> he went on to the head of the world bank. what is the -- what is the -- what is it about this? you could also shed some light on did they think he was successful in the bush administration? >> they thought it went really well. you don't let facts get in the way of your theory. >> when donald rumsfeld was
6:57 am
here i showed him a letter that wolfowitz had signed in 1998 when it wanted to go in and take out saddam hussein and his regime and they actually did what they said they would do. isn't that a plot that we knew what we were going to get? >> they succeeded but a realist would say is what is the cost? we took out saddam hussein and we spent $1 trillion when we were told it would be nothing. i would give wolfowitz the robert mcnamara award. that made him head of the world bank. this is what declining powers do. it is not based on reality paria. that is what happened here. you have spent $1 trillion and you have spent $1 trillion and iraq willlebanon light, mr.
6:58 am
malachi is no democrat. how much more evidence do we need a failure? these are facts. >> if somebody wants to read stuff you have written, where is the easiest place to go? >> you can go online go hitogle. i write regularly for the spectator in britain. i write back to everyone rights to made. >> we can find john hulsman in bavaria, soon to be married and he has been our guest for the last hour, thank you very much. >> it is my great pleasure. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]
6:59 am
>> for a dvd copy of this program, called 1-877-662- +77726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, as a us >> coming up, we will take your questions and comments and the house of representatives gals and for morning business later. this morning on "washington journal" with representative mike kaufman of colorado. also, a discussion on u


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on